Tagged / predatory publishing

BU Research blog in 2023 grows into 2026 publication

open access, Publishing, writing

What started as a BU Research Blog in September 2023 became a properly published paper last week when the Nepal Journal of Public Health published our paper ‘The Final Hurdle: Proofreading your Academic Paper’ [1].  This paper started life as short BU Research Blog with the title ‘Proofreading your article accepted for publication’.  After sharing further experiences about proofreading mishaps the four authors decided to write a paper which is both a reminder to all academics, and piece of advice to perhaps more junior authors.

This paper is the latest in a long line of publications by the authors in the field of health and social care on different aspects of academic writing and publishing.  Earlier articles covered, for example, the writing process, the role of the editor, advice of constructing titles, plagiarism, and many more [2-40].

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

Centre for Midwifery & Women’s Health

 

References:

  1. Harvey, O., Arnold, R., Ireland, J., van Teijlingen, E. (2026). The Final Hurdle: Proofreading your Academic Paper. Nepal Journal of Public Health, 3(1), 58–62. https://doi.org/10.70280/njph(2026)v3i1.65
  2. van Teijlingen E (2004), Why I can’t get any academic writing done, Medical Sociology News 30(3): 62-63. britsoc.co.uk/media/26334/MSN_Nov_2004.pdf
  3. Pitchforth, E, Porter, M, van Teijlingen, ER, Forrest Keenan K. (2005) Writing up and presenting qualitative research in family planning & reproductive health care, Journal of Family Planning & Reproductive Health Care 31(2): 132-35. http://jfprhc.bmj.com/content/31/2/132.full.pdf+html
  4. van Teijlingen E. (2008) RAE pulls academics away from applied multidisciplinary health promotion research International Journal of Health Promotion & Education 46: 116.
  5. van Teijlingen E, Ryan, K., Alexander, J., Marchant, S. (2011) The Research Excellence Framework (REF): new developments to assess research in higher education institutions and its impact on society. MIDIRS 21(3): 298-301.
  6. Hartwell, H., van Teijlingen, E., Parker, J. (2013) Nutrition; Effects of the Research Excellence Framework (REF) Nutrition & Food Science 43(1): 74-77.
  7. Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen E., Hundley, V., Simkhada, BD. (2013) Writing an Abstract for a Scientific Conference, Kathmandu University Medical Journal 11(3): 262-65. http://www.kumj.com.np/issue/43/262-265.pdf
  8. van Teijlingen, E., Ireland, J., Hundley, V., Simkhada, P., Sathian, B. (2014) Finding the right title for your article: Advice for academic authors, Nepal Journal of Epidemiology 4(1): 344-347. http://www.nepjol.info/index.php/NJE/article/view/10138/8265
  9. van Teijlingen, E., Hundley, V., Bick, D. (2014) Who should be an author on your academic paper? Midwifery 30: 385-386.
  10. Hall, J., Hundley, V., van Teijlingen, E. (2015) The journal editor: friend or foe? Women & Birth 28(2): e26-e29.
  11. van Teijlingen E, Simkhada P (2016) Publishing in journals of the NepJOL family. INASP website http://blog.inasp.info/publishing-journals-nepjol-family/
  12. Pradhan, A.K., van Teijlingen, E.R. (2017) Predatory publishing: a great concern for authors, Medical Science 5(4): 43.
  13. van Teijlingen, E.R., Dhakal Adhikari, S., Regmi, P.R., van Teijlingen, A., Aryal, N., Panday, S. (2021). Publishing, identifiers & metrics: Playing the numbers game. Health Prospect, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.3126/hprospect.v20i1.37391
  14. Wasti, S.P., van Teijlingen, E., Simkhada, P.P., Hundley, V. with Shreesh, K. (Eds.) (2022) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books [ISBN: 9789937117609]
  15. Arnold, R., Ireland, J., Mahato, P.,
  16. (2022) Writing and publishing a reflective paper: Three case studies, Welhams Academic Journal 1(1): 4-11. https://college.angels.edu.np/images/Academic_Jornal/Welhams_Academic_Journal_Vol-1.pdf
  17. van Teijlingen, E., Hundley, V., Simkhada, P.P., Wasti, S.P. (2022) Introduction, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 1-4.
  18. Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E., Hundley, V., Swoveet, P. (2022) Writing an Academic Paper, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 6-14.
  19. Hundley, V., Luce, A., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E. (2022) Collaborative Writing for Publication, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 15-19.
  20. van Teijlingen, E., Simkhada, P., Shanker, S. (2022) Selecting an Appropriate Journal and Submitting your Paper, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 20-31.
  21. van Teijlingen, E., Thapa, D., Marahatta, S.B., Sapkota, J.L., Regmi, P. Sathian, B. (2022) Editors and Reviewers: Roles and Responsibilities, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 32-37.
  22. van Teijlingen, E., Ireland, J., Hundley, V, Dhakal Rai, S., Simkhada, P., Sathian, B. (2022) Identifying an appropriate Title, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 39-47.
  23. Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E., Hundley, V., Simkhada, B, Acharya D.R. (2022) Writing an Abstract for a Scientific Conference, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 48-56.
  24. Subedi, M., van Teijlingen, E., Baniya J., Sijapati, B. (2022) Writing the Introduction and Background, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 57-67.
  25. van Teijlingen, E., Pitchforth, E., Keenan Forrest, K., Mahato, P. (2022) Writing a Qualitative Paper, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 88-97.
  26. Wasti, S.P, Devkota, B., Bhatta, D.N., Pitchforth, E., van Teijlingen, E. (2022) Writing the Introduction and Background, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 112-120.
  27. Regmi, P., van Teijlingen, E., Simkhada, P. (2022) Writing up the Discussion, Conclusion and Recommendations, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 121-129
  28. Aryal, N., Regmi, P.R., Simkhada, B., Subedi, M., van Teijlingen, E., Wasti, S.P., Hundley, V, Khatri, R. (2022) Being Ethical in Writing and Publishing, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 153-161.
  29. van Teijlingen, E., Venter, K. (2022) Writing a Book Review, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 162-167.
  30. Devkota, B., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E., Hundley, V, Wasti, S.P. (2022) Writing a Research Proposal, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 168-175.
  31. Wasti, S.P. Regmi, P.R., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E., Hundley, V. (2022) Writing a PhD Proposal, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 176-183.
  32. Hundley, V., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E. (2022) Converting your Master’s or Doctoral Thesis into an Academic Paper for Publication, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 184-189.
  33. van Teijlingen, E., Hundley, V., Simkhada, P., Acharya, J., Silwal, R.C., Wasti, S.P. (2022) Academic Writing: Final Thoughts, In: Wasti, S.P., et al. (Eds.) Academic Writing and Publishing in Health & Social Sciences, Kathmandu, Nepal: Himal Books: 201-20
  34. Harvey, O., van Teijlingen, A., Regmi, P.R., Ireland, J., Rijal, A., van Teijlingen, E.R. (2022) Co-authors, colleagues, and contributors: Complexities in collaboration and sharing lessons on academic writing, Health Prospect 21(1):1-3. https://www.nepjol.info/index.php/HPROSPECT/article/view/39320/31432
  35. van Teijlingen, E., Hundley, V., Sathian, B., Simkhada, P., Robinson, J., Banerjee, I. (2022). The Art of the Editorial. Nepal Journal of Epidemiology 12(1):1135–38. https://doi.org/10.3126/nje.v12i1.43104
  36. Harvey, O., Taylor, A., Regmi, P.R., van Teijlingen, E. (2022) Struggling to reply to reviewers: Some advice for novice researchers. Health Prospect, 21(2):19-22.
  37. Simkhada, B., van Teijlingen, A., Simkhada, P., van Teijlingen, E.R. (2024) ChatGPT: Challenges to editors and examiners. Health Prospect, 23(1): 21–24. https://doi.org/10.3126/hprospect.v23i1.60819
  38. van Teijlingen, E., Subedi, M., Parker, S., Khattri, M.B. (2024) The Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Academic Writing and Publishing Papers, Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology & Anthropology, 18(2): 1-4. https://www.nepjol.info/index.php/DSAJ/article/view/73358
  39. van Teijlingen, E., Balen, J., Regmi, P., Rushton, S., Simkhada, P., Aryal, N. (2025). Bridging Research and Policy: Practical Tips for Writing Policy Briefs. Journal of Health Promotion, 13(1): 89–96. https://doi.org/10.3126/jhp.v13i1.87170
  40. Pandey, R., Khattri, M.B., Subedi, M., Dixit, K.M., van Teijlingen, E. (2026) Navigating Plagiarism in Social Science Research: Epistemic Re-framing or Unethical Redundancy? Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology & Anthropology, 20(1): 1-6.

 

An epidemic of invitations

international, Knowledge Exchange, Publishing, Research Integritiy, writing

Once you have submitted you manuscript to a scientific journal, the editor has a (quick) look at it and sends it out for review.  As I remind students and colleagues in training sessions on academic writing and publishing, the editor and the peer reviewers are academics like me and my colleagues who do both the editing and the reviewing, for free and over and above the day job.  Being an editor and a reviewer are part of being any academic’s so-called scholarly activity.  We are expected to do this as part of the wider scientific community for the benefit of our academic discipline(s).

When an academic receives an invitation to peer review, the journal will send you a copy of the paper’s abstract.  On reading this abstract you then decide whether you wish to do the review.  If the paper sounds interesting and it is in your field and you have the time you may volunteer to conduct a review.  Once you have agreed you will get the full paper (or more likely you are send a link to the publisher’s website).  The requirements of the review report varies between disciplines and often between journals. Some follow an informal structure, but others have a more formal approach, sometimes with scoring systems for sections of the paper.

Unfortunately, academics across the globe are experiencing an ‘epidemic’ of invitations to review for scientific journals.  And I am not talking about so-called predatory publishers, i.e. journals and publishers that are only in it for the monetary gain, no I am talking about legitimate journals sending out invitations to review for them.   Especially scholars with a few decent publications receive several emails a week from often high quality scientific journals.  The photo of my email inbox shows three invitations in a row I received in the space of two hours last week (10th July), two are even from different Associate Editors for the same journal!

I would like to stress that doing peer reviews is very important.  It is the backbone of academic publishing.  Reviewing is part of our overall scholarly responsibility so we all do it, although some more than others.  We all have are favourite journals to review for, perhaps because the journal is high quality, or we like to publish in it ourselves, because we know the editor, or our reviewing is recognised on websites like KUDOS.  I would like to urge colleagues who don’t manage to review at least once a month to step up and agree to review a wee bit more often.

Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen

Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health

BU papers on academic writing are getting read

international, open access, Publishing, writing

Yesterday ResearchGate announced that the paper ‘Academic authorship: who, why and in what order?’ [1] has been read 1000 times.  The paper addresses two related issues in academic writing: (a) authorship; and (b) order of authors. The issue of authorship centres on the notion of who can be an author, who should be an author and who definitely should not be an author.  The paper reminds the reader that this is partly discipline specific. The second issue, the order of authors, is usually dictated by the academic tradition from which the work comes. One can immediately envisage disagreements within a multi-disciplinary team of researchers where members of the team may have different approaches to authorship order.   Prof. Vanora Hundley is the lead author and the paper is co-authored with Prof. Edwin van Teijlingen, both in the Centre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health (CMMPH), and BU Visiting Professor Padam Simkhada.  Padam is Professor of International Public Health in the Public Health Institute at Liverpool John Moores University.

Authorship differs between disciplines

Paper by Hundley et al. published 2013

This paper is part of a larger set of papers by academic in the Faculty of Health & Social Sciences addressing various aspects of academic writing and publishing.  Many of these papers are in Open Access journals, hence easily available across the globe for anybody with an internet connection.  The series has covered papers on selecting an appropriate title for an academic paper, the role of the journal editor, the publication process and many more [2-9].

 

 

References

  1. Hundley, V, van Teijlingen, E, Simkhada, P (2013) Academic authorship: who, why and in what order? Health Renaissance 11(2):98-101 www.healthrenaissance.org.np/uploads/Download/vol-11-2/Page_99_101_Editorial.pdf
  2. Pitchforth, E, Porter M, Teijlingen van E, Keenan Forrest, K.. (2005) Writing up & presenting qualitative research in family planning & reproductive health care, J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care 31(2): 132-135.
  3. Hall, J., Hundley, V., van Teijlingen, E. (2015) The journal editor: friend or foe? Women & Birth 28(2): e26-e29.
  4. Simkhada P, van Teijlingen E, Hundley V. (2013) Writing an academic paper for publication, Health Renaissance 11(1):1-5. www.healthrenaissance.org.np/uploads/Pp_1_5_Guest_Editorial.pdf
  5. van Teijlingen, E., Ireland, J., Hundley, V., Simkhada, P., Sathian, B. (2014) Finding the right title for your article: Advice for academic authors, Nepal J Epidemiol 4(1): 344-347.
  6. van Teijlingen E., Hundley, V., Bick, D. (2014) Who should be an author on your academic paper? Midwifery 30: 385-386.
  7. van Teijlingen, E, Simkhada, PP, Rizyal A (2012) Submitting a paper to an academic peer-reviewed journal, where to start? (Guest Editorial) Health Renaissance 10(1): 1-4.
  8. van Teijlingen, E, Simkhada. PP, Simkhada, B, Ireland J. (2012) The long & winding road to publication, Nepal J Epidemiol 2(4): 213-215 http://nepjol.info/index.php/NJE/article/view/7093/6388
  9. Pradhan, AK, van Teijlingen, ER. (2017) Predatory publishing: a great concern for authors, Med Sci 5(4): 43.

Predatory journals and conferences – how your library team can help

conferences

Predatory journals are those which charge fees without proper editorial and publishing services. In order to help you, library and learning support offer quite a lot of guidance on spotting predatory journals and conferences.

Familiarising oneself with journal rankings and bibliometrics is also a good way of recognising good-quality journals.

Remember that BU library subscribes to Web of Science and Scopus, two of the most important citation databases. These can be accessed through our alphabetical list of databases. Web of Science and Scopus index some of the most quality journals.

Scimago is another good source of information to confirm the quality of a journal. This resource contains additional indices of journals.

In case of doubt regarding a journal, please contact your faculty library team.